What will you say when it comes out conclusively that his cause of death was a self inflicted gunshot wound and that the police did not execute him by arson, as you are speculating? This guy obviously did not want his day in court. As he said himself, he wanted to kill cops and their loved ones. He knew how this game was going to end. If at any point he wanted to surrender, he could have and should have. As I've said before, if he was walking out with his hands up and they shot him dead, I would be right there with you, but that's not what happened.

They lit the house on fire first! What in the hell would be the point of torching the house after the suspect was dead? That simply does not compute. If you really believe those cops would have just let him walk out with his arms up than you have far more faith in the good will ans discipline of those police than I do; I would put my money on them shooting him as soon as he stepped out the door, they were attempting to burn him alive or flush him out with fire!

They were trying to flush him out with tear gas. If you listen to the audio, it's pretty obvious that they expected him to come out the door but they then heard a single gunshot AFTER the gas canisters were fired into the house.

__________________

The views and opinions expressed in this post are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Bimmerpost.

They were trying to flush him out with tear gas. If you listen to the audio, it's pretty obvious that they expected him to come out the door but they then heard a single gunshot AFTER the gas canisters were fired into the house.

I did listen to the audio, and I heard the part about ''going through with the plan, to burn it down'' and ''getting the gas''!

I'm speculating? Really, I find that hard to believe......they shot at two woman, which they obviously didn't get a good look at, never mind the fact the truck was a different colour.
They also shot at another person which was not donor. So I'm pretty sure once they found the real donor there intent was to kill him. No matter how you swing it, the LAPD are some low life pieces of shit. I truly do believe everything donor wrote in his manifesto, I don't agree with some of the things he did. However, there really does need to be change.

"The burner" was shorthand for a grenade-like canister containing a more powerful type of tear gas than had been used earlier. Police use the nickname because of the intense heat the device gives off, which often causes a fire.

And it seems that this thread isn't the only place where views differ on the tactics used:

Quote:

Samuel Walker, emeritus professor of criminal justice at the University of Nebraska Omaha, was critical of the decision to use the "burner" tear gas canisters.

"It's true, he was firing at them. But he was cornered. He was trapped. At that point, there was no rush in the sense that he was barricaded. The standard rules on barricade situations are that you can wait the person out," Walker said. "To use a known incendiary device raises some very serious questions in my mind."

Other law enforcement experts interviewed by The Times, however, said the move was justified. Even though SWAT officers were certain to have known a fire was a strong possibility, the use of the gas was reasonable in the face of the deadly threat Dorner presented, they said. Allowing the standoff to carry on into the night, they emphasized, would have added an unpredictable element to the drama that officials were smart to avoid.

"What difference does it make if one of the officers puts a … round in his head, drives the armored vehicle over his body when they are knocking the building down, or he dies in a conflagration?" said David Klinger, a use-of-force expert at the University of Missouri at St. Louis and a former LAPD officer. "If he is trying to surrender you can't do any of those things … But if he is actively trying to murder people, there's no doubt that deadly force is appropriate and it doesn't matter what method is used to deliver it."

Geoffery Alpert, a professor at the University of South Carolina who also specializes in police tactics, agreed.

"I don't understand what the big deal is," Alpert said. "This man had already shot two officers and was suspected of murdering other people. He wasn't responding in a rational manner. The actions you take have to remove the threat and if it requires extreme measures, then so be it."

__________________

The views and opinions expressed in this post are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Bimmerpost.

Correct if I am wrong, but the term "burner" used in that youtube audio is police slang for tear gas canisters.

...that have a 100% record of starting fires when used in a house or apartment. They're for outside. That's why they said they were going to use the burners to "burn the mother fucker out" and said "burners deployed- we have a fire".

You're missing a fourth, critical option. The option to stop killing and turn himself in was available to him the entire time. He knew he was backed into a corner and instead of getting his day in court, he chose to be his own judge and jury. That should be pretty telling. Innocent people would not fear their day in court, as he obviously did.

I disagree. Cops would open fire without warning on innocent civilians for merely driving trucks. It's only through police incompetence that these police brutality victims are still alive.

Would you guys be this outraged if he gave up and walked out of the house and was cuffed and taken away? I'm just really trying to figure out what outcome you guys were really expecting. Let's say they have him surrounded and he is shot in a shootout - is that so much different? This guy had no intention of being taken alive.

__________________

The views and opinions expressed in this post are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Bimmerpost.

I disagree. Cops would open fire without warning on innocent civilians for merely driving trucks. It's only through police incompetence that these police brutality victims are still alive.

Yes, I agree with you completely on those incidents. 100%. I highly doubt that they would walk up and shoot him if he walked out with his hands up but that's my opinion, just as it is yours that he would be shot. Neither of those things happened.

__________________

The views and opinions expressed in this post are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Bimmerpost.

I'd still be outraged about them opening fire on people without warning just for driving trucks, but if they took him into custody, then no.

The fact of the matter is that the police only have the authority to use violence and destroy property if...
1) They have a warrant
2) To protect the innocent
3) To subdue someone who is VIOLENTLY resisting (and if they had shot Dorner while he was engaged in a shooting fight, that'd be fine). They're supposed to use the minimum amount of force necessary. This is a bad precedent to set to allow the cops to burn down houses and fire at innocent people without warning. The cops were the ones putting the public in danger during this manhunt.

Yes, I agree with you completely on those incidents. 100%. I highly doubt that they would walk up and shoot him if he walked out with his hands up but that's my opinion, just as it is yours that he would be shot. Neither of those things happened.

If they'd open fire on people who in no way matched Dorners description WITHOUT WARNING, why wouldn't they when they were sure they had him?

Ever think that Dorner was trapped in the fire then decided to end his life instead of being burned alive??

From what I heard on the audio, it sounds like the single gunshot heard inside was less than a minute after the "burners" were fired into the house so my thinking is that he probably knew that leaveing the house or burning alive were his only real options so he went out on his terms and by his own hand. I'm only guessing, although aren't we all at this point?

Quote:

Originally Posted by JAM3S

It doesnt make sense and if he was going to commit suicide why not run outside and try to take out more cops?

I don't think he wanted to give them the satisfaction of taking him out on their terms.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JAM3S

Also see another shinning example of the LAPD's integrity.... the couple that told them where Dorner was will not get the $1 million reward because Dorner was not captured alive. Such BS.

Agreed. That's total bullshit.

__________________

The views and opinions expressed in this post are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Bimmerpost.

Would you guys be this outraged if he gave up and walked out of the house and was cuffed and taken away? I'm just really trying to figure out what outcome you guys were really expecting. Let's say they have him surrounded and he is shot in a shootout - is that so much different? This guy had no intention of being taken alive.

To me, the right outcome was to give Dorner at least the opportunity to give up peacefully (while trapped in the cabin), then take him out if all other options were exhausted. There was no place for Dorner to escape to. What Dorner's plans were as far as wanting a trial or taking his own life should have no bearing on how the police chose to handle the situation.
The way the police handled this whole thing just proved Dorner's point, so mission accomplished I guess. Question is, is anyone gonna hold the LAPD accountable or are they gonna just sweep it under the rug.